Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: The man's deed

Expand Messages
  • Terence
    ... Rational clear-minded intelligence tends to hamper the exploration of Soul-Spirit ala Steiner as one needs must move beyond this dimension of mind,
    Message 1 of 22 , May 1 1:09 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "gaelman58" <gaelman58@...>
      wrote:
      >
      > Friends: Let no one underestimate Theodor. He is rational,
      > intelligent and clear-minded. Any open minded critic after reading
      > his posts would be forced to re-evaluate their dopey unsubstantial
      > accusations directed against Steiner with respect to racism,
      > anti-Semitism, and the rest of it. He simply sees Steiner in a much
      > broader context as a result of his reading.

      Rational clear-minded intelligence tends to hamper
      the exploration of Soul-Spirit ala Steiner as one
      needs must move beyond this dimension of mind,
      wouldn't you agree Gaelman? Now as to a broader
      context me thinks not! In esotericism, we are
      instructed to begin our mentation at the level of
      Universals then to Generalities, then to
      Particulars leaving the specific to the individual
      to discover for themselves. It is a macrocosmic
      process that leads to the microcosm. This is the
      BROAD view, as I see it. In my view, it appears
      that Theodor presents as having a handle on the
      specifics of Steiner. Now I ask myself how can one
      human know so much about another human, when in
      reality the vast majority of advanced humanity are,
      in my opinion, at the stage of learning about
      themselves in relationship to the greater whole and
      correlating the micro of themselves with the macro
      and vice versa. Did I say Consciousness Soul Epoch?
      Speaking personally, I am always suspect of the
      veracity of a person who presents as knowing so
      much of another. In recovery we say that the
      greatest task we have is learning to stay inside
      our own skin and making *I* statements.

      > And said context is not so easy to refute, is it? It is the paradigm
      > of the modern educated person and the more hard-minded here know what
      > they're up against. Let no one prove Theodor's point with irrational
      > antagonism solely because he says things about Steiner that any number
      > of intelligent people might.

      I can neither refute nor support what Theodor
      states as I have no basis to do so either from
      personal experience, meditative/contemplative
      experience, or psycho-spiritual experience. All I
      can do is to question how he is able to make such
      statements. You know Gaelman, any one can say
      whatever they choose to say about Steiner. In
      freedom, Theodor has such a right as does anyone
      else; however, can he support his statements with
      historical fact or offer to this list how he knows
      these things. If he canot then he is a fool and I
      will not waste anymore time on him.

      > It was pointed out that Steiner did, in fact, allude to the very real
      > possibility that some would indeed consider him mad...an apparently
      > reasonable conclusion for some...but then :)....ah, but then :)...he
      > indicated that they would have to account for his "earlier works".

      In my opinion, many of us on this list are mad for
      positioning ourselves with Anthroposophy, at least
      from the perspective of the majority of dedicated
      esoteric students let alone the other types of
      people I meet on an everyday basis. I have
      introduced many esoteric type folks to
      Anthroposophy...nada! I am in accord with number
      one statement in Leading Thoughts. So mote it be! I
      am mad, too!

      > And the earlier works, mes amis, outline his epistomology...the very
      > first of the sciences....the science that precedes all others...the
      > science of cognition.

      Here, there is something afoot! The epistemology. I
      love this characterization: Epistemology is the
      investigation of what distinguishes justified
      belief from opinion.

      > Grant that Theodor is a man of good will who, like the rest of us, is
      > primarily interested in the truth...so where do we begin with respect
      > to ascertaining that?...we begin with ourselves and our thinking about
      > ourselves...we begin with cogniton and the basis for our faith in it.
      > The modern materialistic view of reality has, in fact, been
      > undermined. Steiner did that. It's there....in the
      > epistomology....regards, Gaelman

      Bravisimo! We begin with ourselves and our thinking
      about ourselves. Other than challenging Theodor
      about how he arrived at his psychological
      perspective of Steiner, we let the man sink or swim
      of his own accord and graciously move on to the
      next topic presented to the List.

      Terence
    • holderlin66
      Steve Hale wrote: Anyone reading Steiner s autobiography can finding nothing even remotely indicative of his being a benign megolomaniac with schizophrenic
      Message 2 of 22 , May 1 5:45 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        Steve Hale wrote:

        "Anyone reading Steiner's autobiography can finding nothing even
        remotely indicative of his being a benign megolomaniac with
        schizophrenic tendencies; thus a madman."

        Bradford snickers;

        Grekenquist almost sounds like gerken to me. Pickle Puss. I can't
        really claim that a Thedor of any sort lingers behind this hoax of a
        handle IMO. But Carl Jung, John Nash and Albert Schweitzer, and odes
        to sweet and easy humanists who don't dare acknowledge, like Goethe
        that the entire Fifth Epoch is colored by how the double and shadow
        pivot on Saul/Paul's schizophrenic 180, is cowardly escapism for
        those who are afraid of the depth of Initation Science.

        But measuring Steiner is the biggest problem of bad a education. Bad
        education stands before wisdom, brotherhood and humanity like a
        spoiled arrogant pauper measuring themselves and the world in self
        inflated myopic vision. Not to be able to measure greatness in the
        distance of time, but also unable to measure your own qualities in
        the light of psychology and initation science, unable to measure
        each human who comes before you and measure the truth and content of
        a child's soul reveals the entire dullness, denial, retardation, and
        deliberate shameful sloth of the intellectual soul. Again it is
        shrink, shrink, shrink yourselves to the size of your own childish
        shirt. Shrink wrap intelligence so Michael and the gods are mere
        aberrations and chemical distortions to fit the failures in faulty
        sciences.

        grekenquist wrote:

        As I pointed out in my latest post, I admire Rudolf Steiner just
        like I admire John Nash. They both accomplished remarkable things in
        spite of their schizophrenia, and Steiner's accomplishment in
        avoiding a Nash-like collision between illusion and reality through
        a lifetime is
        astounding.

        Carl Jung, John Nash, and Albert Schweitzer perhaps?

        Bradford comments:

        Dialectical materialism enters the ether body and begins to dry it
        up. But something else happens, a mimic begins to grow, a shadow
        distorter, a shape shifter in the proper definition of the term. We
        do not observe the growth of this shape shifter shadow because it is
        so intimately tied to us and because too few people Test Dr. Steiner
        but rather prefer to have his diagnosis buried.

        Steve Hale has often brought that the point each person arrives at,
        is a point where the etheric body, having shrunk from the past to
        the present, fits the outline of the physical brain. As the human I
        takes up higher education, the etheric body, linked to the Sun
        Being, the Age of Light's Etheric Christ Being, begins to expand the
        etheric horizons. But the psychological facts of the haunting of
        Initation Science as realities of culture, will endure.

        Because as the Etheric outline begins to expand, humanity will be
        pressed to consider whole new delicate experiences. The struggle is
        to suppress, compress, contain, distract, deny, distort and promote
        the natural reality of a growing, growing, and living shadow
        instincts in the will and Intellectual Soul that will eventually, if
        not modified, start controlling the instincts of the physical human,
        instead of the I AM monitoring the expansion, the instincts begin to
        flow downward and become part of the severed body of the Earth.
        Substance that will be infested with beings, who refuse to integrate
        through our shared human thought process, the expansion of the
        etheric with a renewed education of the I AM. Science and psychology
        are stuck in matter and so are the brains of human beings.

        The etheric substance in the human being, rather than becoming
        saturated with etheric compassion wrought by the tears we privately
        shed, the joy we experience in seeing the light in childrens eyes...
        A literal shrinking and invoking a 'shadow' being into the etheric
        body in place of the saturating, lucid etheric substance of the
        Risen Christos takes place. I'm afraid, as mad as this sounds, it is
        concrete fact. This is the John Nash syndrome only Steiner had super
        healthy cognitive common sense, given the entire Kingdom that is not
        of this world, that has to be strictly denied and blocked as sub-
        threshold experiences.

        R.S. clinical diagnosis:

        "The Mephistophelean nature is strengthened by all the prejudices and
        limitations of materialism, and a future can already be perceived
        when everyone will be born with a second being by his side, a being
        who whispers to him of the foolishness of those who speak of the
        reality of the spiritual world. Man will, of course, disavow the
        riddle of Mephistopheles, just as he disavows that of the Sphinx;
        nevertheless he will chain a second being to his heels. Accompanied
        by this second being, he will feel the urge to think materialistic
        thoughts, to think, not through his own being, but through the
        second being who is his companion.

        "In an ether-body that has been parched by materialism,
        Mephistopheles will be able to dwell. Understanding what this
        implies, we shall realize that it is our duty to educate children in
        the future - be it by way of Eurythmy or the development of a
        spiritual-scientific outlook - in such a way that they will be
        competent to understand the spiritual world. The ether-body must be
        quickened in order that the human being may be able to take his
        rightful stand, fully cognizant of the nature of the being who
        stands at his side. If he does not understand the nature of this
        second being, he will be spellbound by him, fettered to him."

        Bradford concludes;

        John Nash had a very bad case of this dried out parching of the
        etheric as an actual historical fact. He was stuck in the education
        that promotes the current physics mirage of a universe dominated by
        math abstraction, lies and distortions and his double was dragging
        Nash into this future world, only Nash was more conscious than
        Pickle Puss. Spiritual Science vs Dialectical Materialism is a real
        issue and has gotten more severe, wide spread. When you ask us to
        Test if Steiner's theories are correct, you have no idea what is in
        the future of I AM cognition, having only been schooled yourselves
        in failed Dialectical Materialism.

        We test Dr. Steiner every hour we live. Mr. or Mrs. Pickle, inflated
        hot air, blow up doll, would like a form of dialectical materialism
        to spread so that our children continue learning 'politically
        correct' lies and are unable to think to enter the zone of a Goethe,
        but again, the haunted events will not cease. Both Mr. Smith and Mr.
        Anderson in the Matrix are the same division as Faust and Mephisto
        or Frodo and Gollum.

        Please note post # 9300 from AT list for further reference to
        schizophrenia and the Fifth Epoch.

        In dialectical materialism you are severed from your own soul-heart
        region, even though anyone can still perform unconsciously the basic
        left over goodness in their human instincts. However this will not
        last. People clinging to dialectical materialism are clinging to a
        sinking ship.

        John Nash and a "Beautiful Mind" is a living case in point of
        everything Steiner indicated in the above diagnosis. This Shadow has
        grown in you to such a degree, Mr. or Mrs. Pickled cucumber dick
        that it sits directly next to you and waits, spider like, to play,
        THE DIALECTICAL GAME of drying up your own etheric residue of
        greatness. This is a grave, grave danger when all of humanity has
        lost sight of the very thing that slowly crystallized and finally,
        slowly, devoured and imprisoned the last portion of pip-squeaking
        human dignity, into its slimy egregorical embrace.
      • holderlin66
        Inured to moral horror by half a century of outrages committed by the National Security complex, the establishment, along with the media and vast swathes of
        Message 3 of 22 , May 1 10:10 PM
        • 0 Attachment
          "Inured to moral horror by half a century of outrages committed by
          the "National Security" complex, the establishment, along with the
          media and vast swathes of the population, can no longer discern the
          poison in the air they breathe. It just seems normal."

          http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig7/floyd2.html

          "Imagine growing up in a family where every day, father raped
          daughter, mother tortured son, brother abused brother, sister stole
          from sister and the whole family murdered neighbors, friends and
          passing strangers. Imagine the underlying assumptions about life
          that you would adopt without question in such an atmosphere, how
          normal the most hideous depravity would seem. If some outsider
          chanced to ask you about your family's latest activities, you would
          spew out perversions as calmly and unthinkingly as a man giving
          directions to the post office.

          "This state of unwitting confession to monstrous crime has been the
          default mode of the U.S. establishment for many years now.
          Government officials routinely detail policies that in a healthy
          atmosphere would shake the nation to its core, stand out like a
          gaping wound, a rank betrayal of every hope, ideal and sacrifice of
          generations past. Yet in the degraded sensibility of these times,
          such confessions go unnoticed, their evil unrecognized – or even
          lauded as savvy ploys or noble endeavors. Inured to moral horror by
          half a century of outrages committed by the "National Security"
          complex, the establishment, along with the media and vast swathes of
          the population, can no longer discern the poison in the air they
          breathe. It just seems normal.

          "But this depravity passes without comment, without recognition.
          It's just normal, you see. It's the way we were raised."

          holderlin wrote:

          "...the Age of Light's Etheric Christ Being, begins to expand the
          etheric horizons. But the psychological facts of the haunting of
          Initation Science as realities of culture, will endure.

          Because as the Etheric outline begins to expand, humanity will be
          pressed to consider whole new delicate experiences. The struggle is
          to suppress, compress, contain, distract, deny, distort and promote
          the natural reality of a growing, growing, and living shadow
          instincts in the will and Intellectual Soul that will eventually, if
          not modified, start controlling the instincts of the physical human,
          instead of the I AM monitoring the expansion, the instincts begin to
          flow downward and become part of the severed body of the Earth.
          Substance that will be infested with beings, who refuse to integrate
          through our shared human thought process, the expansion of the
          etheric with a renewed education of the I AM. Science and psychology
          are stuck in matter and so are the brains of human beings.

          "... This is the John Nash syndrome only Steiner had super
          healthy cognitive common sense, given the entire Kingdom that is not
          of this world, that has to be strictly denied and blocked as sub-
          threshold experiences.

          R.S. clinical diagnosis:

          "The Mephistophelean nature is strengthened by all the prejudices and
          limitations of materialism, and a future can already be perceived
          when everyone will be born with a second being by his side, a being
          who whispers to him of the foolishness of those who speak of the
          reality of the spiritual world. Man will, of course, disavow the
          riddle of Mephistopheles, just as he disavows that of the Sphinx;
          nevertheless he will chain a second being to his heels. Accompanied
          by this second being, he will feel the urge to think materialistic
          thoughts, to think, not through his own being, but through the
          second being who is his companion.

          "In an ether-body that has been parched by materialism,
          Mephistopheles will be able to dwell. Understanding what this
          implies, we shall realize that it is our duty to educate children in
          the future - be it by way of Eurythmy or the development of a
          spiritual-scientific outlook - in such a way that they will be
          competent to understand the spiritual world. The ether-body must be
          quickened in order that the human being may be able to take his
          rightful stand, fully cognizant of the nature of the being who
          stands at his side. If he does not understand the nature of this
          second being, he will be spellbound by him, fettered to him."
        • Theodor Grekenquist
          ... I do not think that everyone who has read Steiner s autobiography would agree with that assessment. ... My impression is that Steiner s suppressed,
          Message 4 of 22 , May 2 12:51 AM
          • 0 Attachment
            Hello Steve, you wrote:

            >Anyone reading Steiner's autobiography can finding nothing even
            >remotely indicative of his being a benign megolomaniac with
            >schizophrenic tendencies; thus a madman.

            I do not think that everyone who has read Steiner's autobiography
            would agree with that assessment.

            >And, considering that he didn't start writing it until a little more
            >than a year before his death, it is quite a remarkable achievment of
            >a life remembered; almost from birth. It also demonstrates that he
            >was a caring person who found deep meaning in the very smallest of
            >things. Now, whether he had a painful childhood wherein his
            >suppressed memories translated themselves into his keen style of
            >cognition that would form the basis of the science of the spirit,
            >remains untold, unless it has been told in other places. This
            >theory is what interests me greatly.

            My impression is that Steiner's suppressed, traumatic childhood
            experiences were only one of several contributing factors to his
            pathological mental condition. Chemical imbalances in his brain was
            another, probably electrical overcharge in one of those lobes (I do
            not remember the Latin terminology).

            >One remembrance from Steiner's autobiography that stands out in my
            >memory, and may possibly give some indication of pain and
            >alienation, and its effects, concerns the fact that Steiner's father
            >had a niece who died at a young age, maybe thirteen, and Steiner
            >remembers that something went out of his father when this occurred;
            >that a loss of attention and affection toward him occurred because
            >of this tragedy of the death of the niece. And my sense has always
            >been that Steiner resented this withdrawal of his father, which was
            >like a death of sorts in itself.

            Problematic relationships with parents and siblings seem like a
            common denominator among schizophrenic megalomaniacs. Jesus Christ is
            a case study de luxe. He said you should hate your mother and father
            for the Kindgom of God. Jesus looked after his mother, but he turned
            his back on his father and siblings at a young age and never saw them
            again. Steiner shows the same dysfunctional pattern. He did not even
            bother to invite his mother to his display of miracles like his predecessor.


            Theodor Grekenquist
            http://www.skeptic.com/
          • Theodor Grekenquist
            ... All I can say to this is that on the internet, anyone can be anybody, which makes it counterproductive to challenge exchanges of academic credentials. AQnd
            Message 5 of 22 , May 2 1:33 AM
            • 0 Attachment
              Hello holderlin66, you wrote:

              >Grekenquist almost sounds like gerken to me. Pickle Puss. I can't
              >really claim that a Thedor of any sort lingers behind this hoax of a
              >handle IMO.

              All I can say to this is that on the internet, anyone can be anybody,
              which makes it counterproductive to challenge exchanges of academic
              credentials. AQnd this place has already been called a carnival or
              masquerade or something.

              >But Carl Jung, John Nash and Albert Schweitzer, and odes to sweet
              >and easy humanists who don't dare acknowledge, like Goethe that the
              >entire Fifth Epoch is colored by how the double and shadow pivot on
              >Saul/Paul's schizophrenic 180, is cowardly escapism for those who
              >are afraid of the depth of Initation Science.

              I have a problem with that last part. There are probably some
              superstitious people out there who are afraid of "Initiation
              Science". I am not one of those people. I am not afraid of Christian
              Science, Initiation Science, or any other contrived pseudo-science
              that is supposed to spook non-believers. I have the impression that
              anthros on this list understand that, and this must be why they want
              to intimidate me with wolfish barks and growls and howls and sneers.
              Mike T called me a wolf or a werewolf looking like a sheep. And I am
              wondering if it is my sheepish look that makes me a targeted prey for
              the fiercest anthro-wolves around here. No wonder critics are afraid
              to come to this list, they must be petrified of all this sneering and
              growling from canine anthro-warriors. I said to Mike T that I had no
              intention of devouring anyone, but that does not seem to go both
              ways. These anthro-wolves are trying to take bites out of me. I have
              also heard rumors about furry anthro-pirates. They say Steiner was
              not a Social Darwinist, and I do not think so either, but this looks
              like a Darwinian anthro-jungle where only the strongest and the
              fittest survive and where critics are eaten alive on sight (or smell).

              >But measuring Steiner is the biggest problem of bad a education. Bad
              >education stands before wisdom, brotherhood and humanity like a
              >spoiled arrogant pauper measuring themselves and the world in self
              >inflated myopic vision.

              Who is a spoiled arrogant pauper with bad education?

              >Dialectical materialism enters the ether body and begins to dry it
              >up. But something else happens, a mimic begins to grow, a shadow
              >distorter, a shape shifter in the proper definition of the term. We
              >do not observe the growth of this shape shifter shadow because it is
              >so intimately tied to us and because too few people Test Dr. Steiner
              >but rather prefer to have his diagnosis buried.

              Dear mister Holderin, I have no intention of fleeing from my
              diagnosis if this is offered by a qualified doctor of my choosing.
              And I do not mind going to an anthro-doctor. Steiner obviously had a
              keen understanding of medicine, which he succeeded in extending. I
              support, endorse, and recommend anthroposophical medicine. But if I
              should have met Dr. Steiner himself, I would have proposed an
              exchange of diagnoses. I could pay for his diagnosis of me with mine of him.


              Theodor Grekenquist
              http://www.skeptic.com/
            • elfuncle
              ... was ... do ... I think you re completely off the wall here, also with Steiner s childhood, which seems to have been a happy one except that he felt lonely
              Message 6 of 22 , May 2 8:03 AM
              • 0 Attachment
                Theodor wrote:

                > My impression is that Steiner's suppressed, traumatic childhood
                > experiences were only one of several contributing factors to his
                > pathological mental condition. Chemical imbalances in his brain
                was
                > another, probably electrical overcharge in one of those lobes (I
                do
                > not remember the Latin terminology).

                I think you're completely off the wall here, also with Steiner's
                childhood, which seems to have been a happy one except that he felt
                lonely sometimes because of his exceptional higher stages of
                consciousness.

                It is interesting that you should mention his brain like this,
                though. Rudolf Steiner once said that initiates are sometimes able
                to mold the convolutions of their own brains. I do not have the
                reference; perhaps someone can help me with it. I would not be
                surprised if Steiner had actually influenced his own brain in this
                manner.

                Tarjei
              • Terence
                ... Unable to support your thought with Steiner reference, however, I can say that everytime we meditate, have sex, play sports we alter our brain chemistry,
                Message 7 of 22 , May 2 9:12 AM
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "elfuncle" <reefer@...> wrote:

                  > It is interesting that you should mention his brain like this,
                  > though. Rudolf Steiner once said that initiates are sometimes able
                  > to mold the convolutions of their own brains. I do not have the
                  > reference; perhaps someone can help me with it. I would not be
                  > surprised if Steiner had actually influenced his own brain in this
                  > manner.
                  >
                  > Tarjei

                  Unable to support your thought with Steiner
                  reference, however, I can say that everytime we
                  meditate, have sex, play sports we alter our brain
                  chemistry, which over time may alter the
                  physiology of the brain's structure.

                  Terence
                • holderlin66
                  Bradford previously brought The ZeitGeist arrow and the Double who occupies the personality of President GWB and the Lodge model, the Lodge personality that
                  Message 8 of 22 , May 2 12:20 PM
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Bradford previously brought

                    " The ZeitGeist arrow
                    and the Double who occupies the personality of President GWB and the
                    Lodge model, the Lodge personality that Ariel Sharon and Dick Cheney
                    have borrowed from the Ahrimanic lodges are real profiles. Profiles
                    generally wasted on most Anthros. When Christ walked the Earth and
                    Caiaphas had him crucified, Caiaphas etheric Lodge model was
                    preservered in the cuboard of Ahrimanic forces and imprinted
                    strongly by the intensity of the Sun forces of the Christ Being
                    himself.."

                    Bradford comments:

                    The U.S. has currently a replicated model of a running
                    dysfunctional 'double' in GWB, our current President of the mostly
                    Ahrimanic West. His replication, his immense dull, uninspired
                    Ahrimanically tenured position follows the trend and model of the
                    superfical frat boy, drunk, business and MBA failure, who has based
                    his entire 1/8th farthling of cunning on deceptions and lies sold to
                    the western hemisphere in the trillions, trillions of dollars, in
                    dead bodies and tortured horrors. This is the Presidential Model of
                    the West that reeks of Schizophrenia, egregores and corrupt Lodge
                    manipulation from the darkest cores, aggressively killing out all
                    knowledge of the Etheric Christ event.

                    But all of the weak willed and psychologically numb humans have
                    enjoyed, for so many, many years, the photo ops of politicos
                    dressing up in their tidy suits and playing adults, when in reality
                    they are a hive and lair of brooding, breeding Ahrimanic doubles,
                    all salivating and preparing the way, straightening the way for the
                    coming of the ICE MAN. Schizophrenia should be so easy a diagnosis,
                    but Schizophrenia is not what these issues are about. Cleverly
                    wiggling Steiner into such a schizophrenic corner is attempting to
                    wring discussion on this list and control the issues to see if
                    perhaps there are one or two Anthros with a spine. It hardly merits
                    a challenge, but for the uncognitive slugs, accusing Steiner of
                    terminal hallucinatory schizophrenia is at least as significant as
                    understanding Saul and Paul from a schizophrenic stand point.

                    I have brought very clearly, previously on this list, that once the
                    incarnation of this shadow force within the human magnetic field
                    gets a hold of human instincts and incarnates deep enough to fix the
                    ahrimanic double, with ahrimanic etheric body, ahrimanic astral
                    body, ahrimanic I AM, within the human sphere and within history,
                    than the Black Lodges will really have something to crow about. And
                    because Anthros remain such a weak useless bunch, the enormous time
                    span that Christ gave humanity before Ahriman settles his
                    incarnation, was solid lead time, wasted and crushed by both World
                    Wars and the Bastard Age of Light....that Anthros have hardly even
                    yawned out of their cognitive stupor to correct the historical
                    nonsense that has superimposed and blurred our vision so that
                    Anthros can't even navigate themselves to how the historical Etheric
                    Christ Event was blocked. Rather they have just fallen into step
                    with history as the lie...and let their children drink the Kool-Aid
                    and not one sits at their table correcting this baloney.

                    Presently what we see as the rise of the rich 1% of humanity, the
                    Enron and Haliburton, Cheney and Sharon graduates clawing their way
                    for a whiff of Ahrimanic futures....dominates the media, the talk
                    shows, the murdering and torturing machine that rips, from the
                    tortured, future glimpses of the coming of Ahriman, that only the
                    dead, can reveal under torture...and electronically stolen
                    elections....all of these models of how the U.S. is dominated by the
                    double, are led by the nose by a John Nash like Shadow growin in
                    each of us. Whether ?Thedor? gives it permission to grow or not has
                    nothing to do with Theodor's shrunken materialistic diagnosis.
                    Education which we toss our child into promotes the same pattern of
                    behavior and thinking, promotes the fact that when Spiritual Science
                    gets so close to the system that it can see it clearly, a wonderful
                    new twisted whack job tries to bring STeiner and Initiation Science
                    down to the level of chemical distortions and cheap psychological
                    parlor games...

                    How do the forces of the Luciferic and Ahrimanic doubles hidden in
                    the instincts of humanity play their part? Oil Sheikh's are not your
                    Ahrimanic corporate ravenous wolves. Oil Sheikh's are embedded and
                    sunk into hazy Luciferic forces. So thick are they sunk into
                    traditions that have long ago lost all content, that it amounts to
                    luxurious decadence, and stage prop, movie set, Paradise, that to
                    the simple minded, would appear to be the Luciferic answer to the
                    age old question of 72 virgins, promised in a luciferic haze and
                    presented in gawdy gold and glitz silly story book Arab
                    ornamentation. Offered to primitive, uneducated dolts who are kept
                    in a sentient soul coma waiting for the unveiling of some naked
                    dancing navels, brings the Lodge forces of Luciferic illusion in the
                    middle east to a set of retarded, 19 year old astral weeds, and
                    combines it with the mighty stage sets and gambling mecca that Las
                    Vegas was designed for in the West. Both Arab oil and the Mob
                    Lucifieric Kingdom of Vegas...are the Lodge cores that feed the mass
                    insanity from the Luciferic side of the equation. That at least is
                    the part that is visible. But it is the invisible forces of the
                    Black Lodges of both Lucifer and Ahriman that are intensely working
                    behind the scenes.

                    In the West, from the Ahrimanic side, Cheney's double, Sharon, in
                    his mummified Lodge etheric model, captured just off the threshold
                    of death and held captive to be used as needed, and the U.S.
                    authorization of arbitrary torture, for the reason that by having
                    torture as in the Templars of old were tortured, future clairvoyant
                    visions, Ahrimanic futures, can be ripped from the dead. Black lodge
                    initiates preparing for Ahriman's incarnation in the west can use
                    the information stolen from the tortured to rob, steer and totally
                    guide the gutless, witless, utterly stupid human beings exactly the
                    way the want to.

                    On the Christic side, you have anyone who stands for Spiritual
                    Science which reduces the living numbers, not including the Dead, to
                    probably under a million people who really stand up for The AGE OF
                    LIGHT. While 80% of the Anthro's happily take the nuclear Bastard
                    false age of light against the Etheric Light of the Christ event of
                    1933, so that their children learn that it is the nuclear Bastard,
                    Age of Light that won, and Anthros happily and contentedly sit on
                    the fact that they don't get how the Etheric Christ can compete with
                    the stupendous mushroom cloud offered by Ahrimanic forces in the
                    West. They still ponder how can this be? Anthro's in the general
                    malaise are cowards and uncognitive, uninterested in anything but
                    using Anthro relationships as a new form of mild religious social
                    club instead of a fully operative life line and Science of cognitive
                    events in the current Zeit Geist.

                    holderlin wrote:

                    ".... the entire Fifth Epoch is colored by how the double and shadow
                    pivot on Saul/Paul's schizophrenic 180, is cowardly escapism for
                    those who are afraid of the depth of Initation Science.

                    "... I'm afraid, as mad as this sounds, it is
                    concrete fact. This is the John Nash syndrome only Steiner had
                    super healthy cognitive common sense, given the entire Kingdom that
                    is not of this world, that has to be strictly denied and blocked as
                    sub-threshold experiences.

                    R.S. clinical diagnosis:

                    "The Mephistophelean nature is strengthened by all the prejudices
                    and limitations of materialism, and a future can already be perceived
                    when everyone will be born with a second being by his side, a being
                    who whispers to him of the foolishness of those who speak of the
                    reality of the spiritual world. Man will, of course, disavow the
                    riddle of Mephistopheles, just as he disavows that of the Sphinx;
                    nevertheless he will chain a second being to his heels. Accompanied
                    by this second being, he will feel the urge to think materialistic
                    thoughts, to think, not through his own being, but through the
                    second being who is his companion.

                    "In an ether-body that has been parched by materialism,
                    Mephistopheles will be able to dwell. Understanding what this
                    implies, we shall realize that it is our duty to educate children in
                    the future - be it by way of Eurythmy or the development of a
                    spiritual-scientific outlook - in such a way that they will be
                    competent to understand the spiritual world. The ether-body must be
                    quickened in order that the human being may be able to take his
                    rightful stand, fully cognizant of the nature of the being who
                    stands at his side. If he does not understand the nature of this
                    second being, he will be spellbound by him, fettered to him."

                    Please note post # 9300 from AT list for further reference to
                    schizophrenia and the Fifth Epoch.

                    John Nash and a "Beautiful Mind" is a living case in point of
                    everything Steiner indicated in the above diagnosis.
                  • Steve Hale
                    ... I am very interested in where you see indications of the pain and trauma that could have produced such effects. I am presenting notes that Steiner wrote
                    Message 9 of 22 , May 2 1:07 PM
                    • 0 Attachment
                      --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, Theodor Grekenquist
                      <grekenquist@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > Hello Steve, you wrote:
                      >
                      > >Anyone reading Steiner's autobiography can finding nothing even
                      > >remotely indicative of his being a benign megolomaniac with
                      > >schizophrenic tendencies; thus a madman.
                      >
                      > I do not think that everyone who has read Steiner's autobiography
                      > would agree with that assessment.

                      I am very interested in where you see indications of the pain and
                      trauma that could have produced such effects. I am presenting notes
                      that Steiner wrote about himself that appear to show a very linear
                      progression of thought and normal striving.

                      > >And, considering that he didn't start writing it until a little
                      more
                      > >than a year before his death, it is quite a remarkable achievment
                      of
                      > >a life remembered; almost from birth. It also demonstrates that
                      he
                      > >was a caring person who found deep meaning in the very smallest
                      of
                      > >things. Now, whether he had a painful childhood wherein his
                      > >suppressed memories translated themselves into his keen style of
                      > >cognition that would form the basis of the science of the spirit,
                      > >remains untold, unless it has been told in other places. This
                      > >theory is what interests me greatly.
                      >
                      > My impression is that Steiner's suppressed, traumatic childhood
                      > experiences were only one of several contributing factors to his
                      > pathological mental condition. Chemical imbalances in his brain
                      was
                      > another, probably electrical overcharge in one of those lobes (I
                      do
                      > not remember the Latin terminology).

                      Steiner writes early on about breaking his cups and saucers after he
                      used them, and how his mother learned to quickly snatch them away to
                      avoid this. And how his father took him out of school when a
                      teacher was being unfair, and instructed his son himself in the rail
                      station. Steiner remembers his interest in watching the ink dry on
                      dusted letter paper and why the letters had varying drying times.
                      He would test them and smudge the paper with ink marks. His father
                      eventually came to believe that this great curiosity for physics and
                      mechanics would make his son into a railway engineer. So, I'm
                      trying to find the trauma and the suppressed pain. As I've
                      mentioned before, Steiner starts his autobiography with the
                      remembrance that he was born in the wrong time and the wrong place.
                      And that would mean to the wrong parents and the wrong place and
                      time in the world. Thus, he was before his time, and this could
                      create tremendous hardship.
                      >
                      > >One remembrance from Steiner's autobiography that stands out in
                      my
                      > >memory, and may possibly give some indication of pain and
                      > >alienation, and its effects, concerns the fact that Steiner's
                      father
                      > >had a niece who died at a young age, maybe thirteen, and Steiner
                      > >remembers that something went out of his father when this
                      occurred;
                      > >that a loss of attention and affection toward him occurred
                      because
                      > >of this tragedy of the death of the niece. And my sense has
                      always
                      > >been that Steiner resented this withdrawal of his father, which
                      was
                      > >like a death of sorts in itself.
                      >
                      > Problematic relationships with parents and siblings seem like a
                      > common denominator among schizophrenic megalomaniacs. Jesus Christ
                      is
                      > a case study de luxe. He said you should hate your mother and
                      father
                      > for the Kindgom of God. Jesus looked after his mother, but he
                      turned
                      > his back on his father and siblings at a young age and never saw
                      them
                      > again. Steiner shows the same dysfunctional pattern. He did not
                      even
                      > bother to invite his mother to his display of miracles like his
                      predecessor.

                      Problematic relationships are commonplace, and if you're familiar
                      with family systems theory, dysfunctional families have been the
                      mainstay in life since the end of World War II. It took someone
                      like John Bradshaw and his research on family relationships back in
                      1989 to bring out what people have been openly discussing ever
                      since. But I would question that it is a common denominator for
                      schizophrenia or megalomania. We know that when Steiner's father
                      retired from the railroad that they immediately moved back to Horn.
                      But, since Steiner's autobiography is stated to be a spiritual
                      biography of his developmental path, and not a personal one, how is
                      it possible to discern that he ignored his mother for the rest of
                      her life? He was a busy man to be sure, but where does it say he
                      alienated himself from his mother, father and siblings?

                      Steve
                    • gaelman58
                      ... ... reading ... unsubstantial ... much ... paradigm ... what ... irrational ... number ... real ... apparently ... then :)...he ... works .
                      Message 10 of 22 , May 2 4:15 PM
                      • 0 Attachment
                        --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "Terence"
                        <lionheart@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "gaelman58"
                        <gaelman58@>
                        > wrote:
                        > >
                        > > Friends: Let no one underestimate Theodor. He is rational,
                        > > intelligent and clear-minded. Any open minded critic after
                        reading
                        > > his posts would be forced to re-evaluate their dopey
                        unsubstantial
                        > > accusations directed against Steiner with respect to racism,
                        > > anti-Semitism, and the rest of it. He simply sees Steiner in a
                        much
                        > > broader context as a result of his reading.
                        >
                        > Rational clear-minded intelligence tends to hamper
                        > the exploration of Soul-Spirit ala Steiner as one
                        > needs must move beyond this dimension of mind,
                        > wouldn't you agree Gaelman? Now as to a broader
                        > context me thinks not! In esotericism, we are
                        > instructed to begin our mentation at the level of
                        > Universals then to Generalities, then to
                        > Particulars leaving the specific to the individual
                        > to discover for themselves. It is a macrocosmic
                        > process that leads to the microcosm. This is the
                        > BROAD view, as I see it. In my view, it appears
                        > that Theodor presents as having a handle on the
                        > specifics of Steiner. Now I ask myself how can one
                        > human know so much about another human, when in
                        > reality the vast majority of advanced humanity are,
                        > in my opinion, at the stage of learning about
                        > themselves in relationship to the greater whole and
                        > correlating the micro of themselves with the macro
                        > and vice versa. Did I say Consciousness Soul Epoch?
                        > Speaking personally, I am always suspect of the
                        > veracity of a person who presents as knowing so
                        > much of another. In recovery we say that the
                        > greatest task we have is learning to stay inside
                        > our own skin and making *I* statements.
                        >
                        > > And said context is not so easy to refute, is it? It is the
                        paradigm
                        > > of the modern educated person and the more hard-minded here know
                        what
                        > > they're up against. Let no one prove Theodor's point with
                        irrational
                        > > antagonism solely because he says things about Steiner that any
                        number
                        > > of intelligent people might.
                        >
                        > I can neither refute nor support what Theodor
                        > states as I have no basis to do so either from
                        > personal experience, meditative/contemplative
                        > experience, or psycho-spiritual experience. All I
                        > can do is to question how he is able to make such
                        > statements. You know Gaelman, any one can say
                        > whatever they choose to say about Steiner. In
                        > freedom, Theodor has such a right as does anyone
                        > else; however, can he support his statements with
                        > historical fact or offer to this list how he knows
                        > these things. If he canot then he is a fool and I
                        > will not waste anymore time on him.
                        >
                        > > It was pointed out that Steiner did, in fact, allude to the very
                        real
                        > > possibility that some would indeed consider him mad...an
                        apparently
                        > > reasonable conclusion for some...but then :)....ah, but
                        then :)...he
                        > > indicated that they would have to account for his "earlier
                        works".
                        >
                        > In my opinion, many of us on this list are mad for
                        > positioning ourselves with Anthroposophy, at least
                        > from the perspective of the majority of dedicated
                        > esoteric students let alone the other types of
                        > people I meet on an everyday basis. I have
                        > introduced many esoteric type folks to
                        > Anthroposophy...nada! I am in accord with number
                        > one statement in Leading Thoughts. So mote it be! I
                        > am mad, too!
                        >
                        > > And the earlier works, mes amis, outline his epistomology...the
                        very
                        > > first of the sciences....the science that precedes all
                        others...the
                        > > science of cognition.
                        >
                        > Here, there is something afoot! The epistemology. I
                        > love this characterization: Epistemology is the
                        > investigation of what distinguishes justified
                        > belief from opinion.
                        >
                        > > Grant that Theodor is a man of good will who, like the rest of
                        us, is
                        > > primarily interested in the truth...so where do we begin with
                        respect
                        > > to ascertaining that?...we begin with ourselves and our thinking
                        about
                        > > ourselves...we begin with cogniton and the basis for our faith
                        in it.
                        > > The modern materialistic view of reality has, in fact, been
                        > > undermined. Steiner did that. It's there....in the
                        > > epistomology....regards, Gaelman
                        >
                        > Bravisimo! We begin with ourselves and our thinking
                        > about ourselves. Other than challenging Theodor
                        > about how he arrived at his psychological
                        > perspective of Steiner, we let the man sink or swim
                        > of his own accord and graciously move on to the
                        > next topic presented to the List.
                        >
                        > Terence


                        > Terence wrote: "You know Gaelman, any one can say
                        whatever they choose to say about Steiner. In
                        freedom, Theodor has such a right as does anyone
                        else; however, can he support his statements with
                        historical fact or offer to this list how he knows
                        these things. If he canot then he is a fool and I
                        will not waste anymore time on him."

                        Terence: I would ask you to show a little forbearance with regard
                        to the "wasting of your time". Why? Well, you write well and add
                        to the quality of the list. What is happening with Theodor is the
                        very thing that Steiner predicted would arise as an impediment to
                        Spiritual science in our time. An intelligent, well-read modern
                        person who accepts the very powerful current scientific paradigm is
                        no slouch who can be dismissed out of hand. It's always been my
                        suspicion (just a suspicion, mind you) that the Waldorf Critics were
                        acting out of a personal point of view as the result of some bad
                        experience they had with WE. I don't think that's the case with
                        Theodor...and I don't think he's being deliberately offensive when
                        he "psychoanalyzes" Steiner and inadvertently offends those who hold
                        the man dear.

                        You are quite right with your "Oh yes? Well, Theodor, how is it
                        that you KNOW that to be demonstratively true". The the rest of us
                        can then see the man's thinking...or what he thinks will pass for
                        thinking"...sooner or later (we hope) we can mosey over toward a
                        consideration of cognition...you know, the considerations that one
                        has to think meditatively about...and it's there that the
                        current, "scientic" view of reality is vulnerable...by the way,
                        Terence, with regard to that I hold no brief and do not make the
                        claim that I think better than anyone here...so, as one student to
                        another...best regards, Gaelman
                      • Steve Hale
                        Somebody pointed out the other day that I intended to offer a forum two years ago called Spiritual Science Today . And that I did so in private conversations
                        Message 11 of 22 , May 2 7:01 PM
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Somebody pointed out the other day that I intended to offer a forum
                          two years ago called "Spiritual Science Today". And that I did so
                          in private conversations to members of this forum back in January of
                          2004. Well, I remember doing so, and then I got caught up in this
                          forum and decided to present it here, folded into the contezt and
                          content of Anthroposophy_Tomorrow. It seemed the right thing; now
                          that I look back on it. I loved the dynamism and the points of
                          view, as I do now.

                          Steve

                          --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "gaelman58"
                          <gaelman58@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "Terence"
                          > <lionheart@> wrote:
                          > >
                          > > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "gaelman58"
                          > <gaelman58@>
                          > > wrote:
                          > > >
                          > > > Friends: Let no one underestimate Theodor. He is rational,
                          > > > intelligent and clear-minded. Any open minded critic after
                          > reading
                          > > > his posts would be forced to re-evaluate their dopey
                          > unsubstantial
                          > > > accusations directed against Steiner with respect to racism,
                          > > > anti-Semitism, and the rest of it. He simply sees Steiner in
                          a
                          > much
                          > > > broader context as a result of his reading.
                          > >
                          > > Rational clear-minded intelligence tends to hamper
                          > > the exploration of Soul-Spirit ala Steiner as one
                          > > needs must move beyond this dimension of mind,
                          > > wouldn't you agree Gaelman? Now as to a broader
                          > > context me thinks not! In esotericism, we are
                          > > instructed to begin our mentation at the level of
                          > > Universals then to Generalities, then to
                          > > Particulars leaving the specific to the individual
                          > > to discover for themselves. It is a macrocosmic
                          > > process that leads to the microcosm. This is the
                          > > BROAD view, as I see it. In my view, it appears
                          > > that Theodor presents as having a handle on the
                          > > specifics of Steiner. Now I ask myself how can one
                          > > human know so much about another human, when in
                          > > reality the vast majority of advanced humanity are,
                          > > in my opinion, at the stage of learning about
                          > > themselves in relationship to the greater whole and
                          > > correlating the micro of themselves with the macro
                          > > and vice versa. Did I say Consciousness Soul Epoch?
                          > > Speaking personally, I am always suspect of the
                          > > veracity of a person who presents as knowing so
                          > > much of another. In recovery we say that the
                          > > greatest task we have is learning to stay inside
                          > > our own skin and making *I* statements.
                          > >
                          > > > And said context is not so easy to refute, is it? It is the
                          > paradigm
                          > > > of the modern educated person and the more hard-minded here
                          know
                          > what
                          > > > they're up against. Let no one prove Theodor's point with
                          > irrational
                          > > > antagonism solely because he says things about Steiner that
                          any
                          > number
                          > > > of intelligent people might.
                          > >
                          > > I can neither refute nor support what Theodor
                          > > states as I have no basis to do so either from
                          > > personal experience, meditative/contemplative
                          > > experience, or psycho-spiritual experience. All I
                          > > can do is to question how he is able to make such
                          > > statements. You know Gaelman, any one can say
                          > > whatever they choose to say about Steiner. In
                          > > freedom, Theodor has such a right as does anyone
                          > > else; however, can he support his statements with
                          > > historical fact or offer to this list how he knows
                          > > these things. If he canot then he is a fool and I
                          > > will not waste anymore time on him.
                          > >
                          > > > It was pointed out that Steiner did, in fact, allude to the
                          very
                          > real
                          > > > possibility that some would indeed consider him mad...an
                          > apparently
                          > > > reasonable conclusion for some...but then :)....ah, but
                          > then :)...he
                          > > > indicated that they would have to account for his "earlier
                          > works".
                          > >
                          > > In my opinion, many of us on this list are mad for
                          > > positioning ourselves with Anthroposophy, at least
                          > > from the perspective of the majority of dedicated
                          > > esoteric students let alone the other types of
                          > > people I meet on an everyday basis. I have
                          > > introduced many esoteric type folks to
                          > > Anthroposophy...nada! I am in accord with number
                          > > one statement in Leading Thoughts. So mote it be! I
                          > > am mad, too!
                          > >
                          > > > And the earlier works, mes amis, outline his
                          epistomology...the
                          > very
                          > > > first of the sciences....the science that precedes all
                          > others...the
                          > > > science of cognition.
                          > >
                          > > Here, there is something afoot! The epistemology. I
                          > > love this characterization: Epistemology is the
                          > > investigation of what distinguishes justified
                          > > belief from opinion.
                          > >
                          > > > Grant that Theodor is a man of good will who, like the rest of
                          > us, is
                          > > > primarily interested in the truth...so where do we begin with
                          > respect
                          > > > to ascertaining that?...we begin with ourselves and our
                          thinking
                          > about
                          > > > ourselves...we begin with cogniton and the basis for our faith
                          > in it.
                          > > > The modern materialistic view of reality has, in fact, been
                          > > > undermined. Steiner did that. It's there....in the
                          > > > epistomology....regards, Gaelman
                          > >
                          > > Bravisimo! We begin with ourselves and our thinking
                          > > about ourselves. Other than challenging Theodor
                          > > about how he arrived at his psychological
                          > > perspective of Steiner, we let the man sink or swim
                          > > of his own accord and graciously move on to the
                          > > next topic presented to the List.
                          > >
                          > > Terence
                          >
                          >
                          > > Terence wrote: "You know Gaelman, any one can say
                          > whatever they choose to say about Steiner. In
                          > freedom, Theodor has such a right as does anyone
                          > else; however, can he support his statements with
                          > historical fact or offer to this list how he knows
                          > these things. If he canot then he is a fool and I
                          > will not waste anymore time on him."
                          >
                          > Terence: I would ask you to show a little forbearance with regard
                          > to the "wasting of your time". Why? Well, you write well and
                          add
                          > to the quality of the list. What is happening with Theodor is the
                          > very thing that Steiner predicted would arise as an impediment to
                          > Spiritual science in our time. An intelligent, well-read modern
                          > person who accepts the very powerful current scientific paradigm
                          is
                          > no slouch who can be dismissed out of hand. It's always been my
                          > suspicion (just a suspicion, mind you) that the Waldorf Critics
                          were
                          > acting out of a personal point of view as the result of some bad
                          > experience they had with WE. I don't think that's the case with
                          > Theodor...and I don't think he's being deliberately offensive when
                          > he "psychoanalyzes" Steiner and inadvertently offends those who
                          hold
                          > the man dear.
                          >
                          > You are quite right with your "Oh yes? Well, Theodor, how is it
                          > that you KNOW that to be demonstratively true". The the rest of
                          us
                          > can then see the man's thinking...or what he thinks will pass for
                          > thinking"...sooner or later (we hope) we can mosey over toward a
                          > consideration of cognition...you know, the considerations that one
                          > has to think meditatively about...and it's there that the
                          > current, "scientic" view of reality is vulnerable...by the way,
                          > Terence, with regard to that I hold no brief and do not make the
                          > claim that I think better than anyone here...so, as one student to
                          > another...best regards, Gaelman
                          >
                        • Theodor Grekenquist
                          ... It is very difficult to determine what those unpleasant childhhood experiences were. There is not a trace of them in his autobiography because they were
                          Message 12 of 22 , May 3 8:21 AM
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Hello Steve, you wrote:

                            >I am very interested in where you see indications of the pain and
                            >trauma that could have produced such effects.

                            It is very difficult to determine what those unpleasant childhhood
                            experiences were. There is not a trace of them in his autobiography
                            because they were suppressed and forgotten. Steiner says himself that
                            such things *should* be forgotten. He calls them slime at the bottom
                            of the soul. I have a reference to this: See the fifth lecture in
                            "The Karma of Vocation" (GA 172), Dornach, November 13, 1916:

                            " But what people are now trying to find on the bottom of the soul's
                            life is really some sort of soulless sediment. A theologian recently
                            called it somewhat coarsely - 'the bestial slime at the bottom of the soul.' "

                            Rudolf Steiner suppressed all the bestial slime at the bottom of his
                            soul because he thought it should be suppressed. He suppressed his
                            animal nature because he wanted to be some sort of god-man like Jesus
                            Christ. And this suppression resulted in those firecrackers in his
                            neurological makeup and the electrical overcharge in his brain that I
                            mentioned in an earlier post, the firecrackers that went off when he
                            was 40 and sent him into fantasyland like a space cadet.

                            >I am presenting notes that Steiner wrote about himself that appear
                            >to show a very linear progression of thought and normal striving.

                            Comparing notes is a good idea. It is what lists like this one are all about.

                            I understand Steiner's diagnosis as a trauma-induced schizophrenic
                            because I have experienced something related to this. When I was a
                            teenager, I was diagnosed with 25 different personalities. After
                            that, I have gone to therapy and treated others too, and for a long
                            time I have not been in danger of changing personalities at work,
                            because I sense them coming hours in advance and sometimes days in
                            advance, especially if I have been drinking alcohol. At present, my
                            number of active personalities is reduced to a handful.

                            One thing that has helped me is my conviction of scientific reality.
                            It keeps me grounded and helps control my multiple personalities.
                            Reading about Steiner's monism in "Philosophy of Freedom" was a great
                            help, but it did not help him as he thought it would. Monism means
                            that reality is what one can see and hear and touch, but Steiner
                            dismisses this as "naive realism" and that is how he gets lost. He
                            tried to cure himself with monism, but instead he came up with a wild
                            notion of epistemology to justify his own schizophrenic confusion of
                            fantasy and reality.


                            Theodor Grekenquist
                            http://www.skeptic.com/
                          • Steve Hale
                            I had a co-worker about a year ago who confided to me early on that he was both bipolar and suffered from attention deficit disorder. He also smoked and drank
                            Message 13 of 22 , May 3 11:09 AM
                            • 0 Attachment
                              I had a co-worker about a year ago who confided to me early on that
                              he was both bipolar and suffered from attention deficit disorder.
                              He also smoked and drank strong coffee, so he literally bounced off
                              the walls. He was keenly intelligent with strong reverence for
                              mathematics and science especially. He entrusted to me the fact
                              that he needed a grounded experience of the material world as his
                              sole reality. He never dreamed. When I attempted to introduce
                              basic principles of spiritual science and its logical ground he
                              would get visibly agitated, as if he was losing his bearings. I had
                              to change the subject, and eventually gave up this idea, which made
                              him comfortable again. It was just one of those things. He was
                              completely convinced that there could be no underlying reality
                              invisible to his senses and logic, and the very idea was very
                              upsetting.

                              Steve

                              --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, Theodor Grekenquist
                              <grekenquist@...> wrote:
                              >
                              > Hello Steve, you wrote:
                              >
                              > >I am very interested in where you see indications of the pain and
                              > >trauma that could have produced such effects.
                              >
                              > It is very difficult to determine what those unpleasant childhhood
                              > experiences were. There is not a trace of them in his
                              autobiography
                              > because they were suppressed and forgotten. Steiner says himself
                              that
                              > such things *should* be forgotten. He calls them slime at the
                              bottom
                              > of the soul. I have a reference to this: See the fifth lecture in
                              > "The Karma of Vocation" (GA 172), Dornach, November 13, 1916:
                              >
                              > " But what people are now trying to find on the bottom of the
                              soul's
                              > life is really some sort of soulless sediment. A theologian
                              recently
                              > called it somewhat coarsely - 'the bestial slime at the bottom of
                              the soul.' "
                              >
                              > Rudolf Steiner suppressed all the bestial slime at the bottom of
                              his
                              > soul because he thought it should be suppressed. He suppressed his
                              > animal nature because he wanted to be some sort of god-man like
                              Jesus
                              > Christ. And this suppression resulted in those firecrackers in his
                              > neurological makeup and the electrical overcharge in his brain
                              that I
                              > mentioned in an earlier post, the firecrackers that went off when
                              he
                              > was 40 and sent him into fantasyland like a space cadet.
                              >
                              > >I am presenting notes that Steiner wrote about himself that
                              appear
                              > >to show a very linear progression of thought and normal striving.
                              >
                              > Comparing notes is a good idea. It is what lists like this one are
                              all about.
                              >
                              > I understand Steiner's diagnosis as a trauma-induced schizophrenic
                              > because I have experienced something related to this. When I was a
                              > teenager, I was diagnosed with 25 different personalities. After
                              > that, I have gone to therapy and treated others too, and for a
                              long
                              > time I have not been in danger of changing personalities at work,
                              > because I sense them coming hours in advance and sometimes days in
                              > advance, especially if I have been drinking alcohol. At present,
                              my
                              > number of active personalities is reduced to a handful.
                              >
                              > One thing that has helped me is my conviction of scientific
                              reality.
                              > It keeps me grounded and helps control my multiple personalities.
                              > Reading about Steiner's monism in "Philosophy of Freedom" was a
                              great
                              > help, but it did not help him as he thought it would. Monism means
                              > that reality is what one can see and hear and touch, but Steiner
                              > dismisses this as "naive realism" and that is how he gets lost. He
                              > tried to cure himself with monism, but instead he came up with a
                              wild
                              > notion of epistemology to justify his own schizophrenic confusion
                              of
                              > fantasy and reality.
                              >
                              >
                              > Theodor Grekenquist
                              > http://www.skeptic.com/
                              >
                            • winters_diana
                              ... Diana in amused amazement: Gaelman, this is a suspicion you have? Have you ever read the critics list? A wide variety of such experiences are detailed in
                              Message 14 of 22 , May 3 1:33 PM
                              • 0 Attachment
                                gaelman wrote:

                                >It's always been my suspicion (just a suspicion, mind you) that the
                                >Waldorf Critics were acting out of a personal point of view as the
                                >result of some bad experience they had with WE.

                                Diana in amused amazement: Gaelman, this is a "suspicion" you have?
                                Have you ever read the critics list? A wide variety of such
                                experiences are detailed in the critics list archives, which go back
                                about 10 years. Yes: most critics are people who had bad experiences
                                with the Waldorf schools, or to be clearer, whose CHILDREN had bad
                                experiences (and parents tend to take that hard, especially when the
                                moon was promised, or the Next Epoch etc).

                                Hello!! What did you think the point was?

                                btw, gaelman, I've finally looked at your book, at least the tidbits
                                one can find at the site you directed us to. It looks quite
                                interesting, though I don't go for historical fiction myself,
                                usually.

                                Diana
                              • Tarjei Straume
                                ... You seem to have misunderstood Rudolf Steiner s epistemology as a whole, and I don t think you ve grasped the definitions of his terms. I wrote a few
                                Message 15 of 22 , May 4 11:14 AM
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Theodor wrote:

                                  Reading about Steiner's monism in "Philosophy of Freedom" was a great help, but it did not help him as he thought it would. Monism means that reality is what one can see and hear and touch, but Steiner dismisses this as "naive realism" and that is how he gets lost. He tried to cure himself with monism, but instead he came up with a wild notion of epistemology to justify his own schizophrenic confusion of fantasy and reality.

                                  You seem to have misunderstood Rudolf Steiner's epistemology as a whole, and I don't think you've grasped the definitions of his terms. I wrote a few articles about this topic a decade ago, and here is an excerpt going to the heart of this particular matter:

                                    http://www.uncletaz.com/anthranark.html

                                  ************************************************************************
                                  The Philosophy of Freedom aims to demonstrate that monism is an absolute presupposition for perfect, unencumbered spiritual freedom. If we shall be capable of liberating ourselves completely from all coercion and authority, internal and external, physical and metaphysical, we cannot remain in a dualistic world that hides ghosts we can never approach. We must call on monism's help to tear down those limitations that the dominant dualistic culture has enforced upon human cognition like some kind of occult permanent boundary.

                                  In this way, monism wishes to enable the development of unencumbered free will as well as the cognition that the potential of human empiricism is unlimited. The Philosophy of Freedom has as its goal, therefore, to define the presuppositions for free action.

                                  In order to develop the "free spirit," Steiner argued that one would have to liberate onself from inner and outer tyranny alike. In the tenth chapter, Freedom - Philosophy and Monism, Steiner defines the difference between "naïve realism" and "metaphysical realism." Naïve realism is bound by sensory authorities:

                                  "The naïve man, who acknowledges as real only what he can see with his eyes and grasp with his hands, requires for his moral life, also, a basis for action that shall be perceptible to the senses. He requires someone or something to impart the basis for his action to him in a way that his senses can understand. He is ready to allow this basis for action to be dictated to him as commandments by any man whom he considers wiser or more powerful than himself, or whom he acknowledges for some other reason to be a power over him. In this way there arise, as moral principles, the authority of family, state, society, church and God, as previously described. A man who is very narrow minded still puts his faith in some one person; the more advanced man allows his moral conduct to be dictated by a majority (state, society). It is always on perceptible powers that he builds. The man who awakens at last to the conviction that basically these powers are human beings as weak as himself, seeks guidance from a higher power, from a Divine Being, whom he endows, however, with sense perceptible features. He conceives this Being as communicating to him the conceptual content of his moral life, again in a perceptible way - whether it be, for example, that God appears in the burning bush, or that He moves about among men in manifest human shape, and that their ears can hear Him telling them what to do and what not to do."
                                  - Die Philosophie der Freiheit 1894, GA #4: kap. 10: Freiheitsphilosophie und Monismus.

                                  Perhaps it may seem a little odd that Steiner puts so much emphasis on such things as hands, eyes, ears, etc. in relation to inner images. In the course of his years, he often spoke about the necessity of developing "sensefree thinking," i.e. a more flexible kind of mental activity that is less dependent upon the grey braincells. (It ought to be taken note here of the fact that Anthroposophy views the brain as a sense organ, so that thoughts are perceived by the brain just like sounds are perceived by the ear.) Many of his utterances appear absurd when they are approached with a thinking that is spellbound by the physical brain because they aim to give the listener inner pictures that do not reflect anything sensory, and thereby contribute to the development of sensefree thinking.

                                  The metaphysical realist does not think any more sensefree than the naïve realist is doing. He only projects physical concepts to a metphysical plane:

                                  "The highest stage of development of naïve realism in the sphere of morality is that where the moral commandment (moral idea) is separated from every being other than oneself and is thought of, hypothetically, as being an absolute power in one's own inner life. What man first took to be the external voice of God, he now takes as an independent power within him, and speaks of this inner voice in such a way as to identify it with conscience.

                                  "But in doing this he has already gone beyond the stage of naïve consciousness into the sphere where the moral laws have become independently existing standards. There they are no longer carried by real bearers, but have become metaphysical entities existing in their own right. They are analogous to the invisible "visible forces" of metaphysical realism, which does not seek reality through the part of it that man has in his thinking, but hypothetically adds it on to actual experience. These extra-human moral standards always occur as accompanying features of metaphysical realism. For metaphysical realism is bound to seek the origin of morality in the sphere of extra-human reality."
                                  Ibid.

                                  Steiner argued that dialectical materialism made freedom impossible because it enslaved thinking in a mechanical universe. He continues:

                                  "If the hypothetically assumed entity is conceived as in itself unthinking, acting according to purely mechanical laws, as materialism would have it, then it must also produce out of itself, by purely mechanical necessity, the human individual with all his characteristic features. The consciousness of freedom can then be nothing more than an illusion. For though I consider myself the author of my action, it is the matter of which I am composed and the movements going on in it that are working in me. I believe myself free; but in fact all my actions are nothing but the result of the material processes which underlie my physical and mental organization. It is said that we have the feeling of freedom only because we do not know the motives compelling us."
                                  Ibid.

                                  After that, Steiner confronts spiritualistic dualism. Today, this variety is better known as religious fundamentalism:

                                  "Whereas the materialistic dualist makes man an automaton whose actions are only the result of a purely mechanical system, the spiritualistic dualist (that is, one who sees the Absolute, the Being-in-itself, as something spiritual in which man has no share in his conscious experience) makes him a slave to the will of the Absolute. As in materialism, so also in one-sided spiritualism, in fact in any kind of metaphysical realism inferring but not experiencing something extra-human as the true reality, freedom is out of the question.

                                  Metaphysical as well as naïve realism, consistently followed out, must deny freedom for one and the same reason: they both see man as doing no more than putting into effect, or carrying out, principles forced upon him by necessity. Naive realism destroys freedom by subjecting man to the authority of a perceptible being or of one conceived on the analogy of a perceptible being, or eventually to the authority of the abstract inner voice which it interprets as 'conscience'; the metaphysician, who merely infers the extra-human reality, cannot acknowledge freedom because he sees man as being determined, mechanically or morally, by a 'Being-in-itself'."
                                  Ibid.

                                  The core in Rudolf Steiner's monism is the sovereign independence of the single individual in thinking as well as in doing. The human being itself and nothing else is the determining factor with regard to moral behavior:

                                  "The moral laws which the metaphysician who works by mere inference must regard as issuing from a higher power, are, for the adherent of monism, thoughts of men; for him the moral world order is neither the imprint of a purely mechanical natural order, nor that of an extra-human world order, but through and through the free creation of men. It is not the will of some being outside him in the world that man has to carry out, but his own; he puts into effect his own resolves and intentions, not those of another being. Monism does not see, behind man's actions, the purposes of a supreme directorate, foreign to him and determining him according to its will, but rather sees that men, in so far as they realize their intuitive ideas, pursue only their own human ends. Moreover, each individual pursues his own particular ends. For the world of ideas comes to expression, not in a community of men, but only in human individuals. What appears as the common goal of a whole group of people is only the result of the separate acts of will of its individual members, and in fact, usually of a few outstanding ones who, as their authorities, are followed by the others. Each one of us has it in him to be a free spirit, just as every rose bud has in it a rose."
                                  Ibid.

                                  Charles Darwin's theory of evolution holds a central position in Rudolf Steiner's philosophy. For him, the moral development of the soul was the most important aspect of evolution, and for this reson, he was confident that human beings would develop their free spirits through the experiences of life.

                                  Steiner writes on:

                                  "Monism knows that Nature does not send man forth from her arms ready made as a free spirit, but that she leads him up to a certain stage from which he continues to develop still as an unfree being until he comes to the point where he finds his own self.

                                  Monism is quite clear that a being acting under physical or moral compulsion cannot be a truly moral being. It regards the phases of automatic behavior (following natural urges and instincts) and of obedient behavior (following moral standards) as necessary preparatory stages of morality, but it also sees that both these transitory stages can be overcome by the free spirit. Monism frees the truly moral world conception both from the mundane fetters of naïve moral maxims and from the transcendental moral maxims of the speculative metaphysician. Monism can no more eliminate the former from the world than it can eliminate percepts; it rejects the latter because it seeks all the principles for the elucidation of the world phenomena within that world, and none outside it."
                                  Ibid.

                                  ************************************************************************

                                  Cheers,

                                  Tarjei
                                • Theodor Grekenquist
                                  ... No underlying reality, invisible or invisible, logical or illogical, is upsetting to me in the slightest. If something is illogical and invisible and
                                  Message 16 of 22 , May 4 11:27 AM
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    Hello Steve, you wrote:

                                    >I had a co-worker about a year ago who confided to me early on that
                                    >he was both bipolar and suffered from attention deficit disorder. He
                                    >also smoked and drank strong coffee, so he literally bounced off the
                                    >walls. He was keenly intelligent with strong reverence for
                                    >mathematics and science especially. He entrusted to me the fact
                                    >that he needed a grounded experience of the material world as his
                                    >sole reality. He never dreamed. When I attempted to introduce
                                    >basic principles of spiritual science and its logical ground he
                                    >would get visibly agitated, as if he was losing his bearings. I had
                                    >to change the subject, and eventually gave up this idea, which made
                                    >him comfortable again. It was just one of those things. He was
                                    >completely convinced that there could be no underlying reality
                                    >invisible to his senses and logic, and the very idea was very upsetting.

                                    No underlying reality, invisible or invisible, logical or illogical,
                                    is upsetting to me in the slightest. If something is illogical and
                                    invisible and inaudible and so on, it is also unthinkable to me and
                                    therefore not real. I have never been spooked by anyone's non-entities.

                                    My multiple personalities are not related to fear, but they do result
                                    in occasional temporary perplexity, bewilderment, until I find my
                                    bearings again. They just happen.


                                    Theodor Grekenquist
                                    http://www.skeptic.com/
                                  • Terence
                                    ... wrote: SNIP ... I am curious which one of the multiples of personalities you have expressing through you *just happened* to write about
                                    Message 17 of 22 , May 4 1:04 PM
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, Theodor Grekenquist
                                      <grekenquist@...> wrote:

                                      SNIP

                                      > My multiple personalities are not related to fear, but they do result
                                      > in occasional temporary perplexity, bewilderment, until I find my
                                      > bearings again. They just happen.

                                      I am curious which one of the multiples of
                                      personalities you have expressing through you *just
                                      happened* to write about the psychological state of
                                      Steiner?

                                      Bewildered,

                                      Terence
                                    • Mike T
                                      Theodor, Would you be so good as to explain some of these multiple personalities you appear to have. Is it anything like the movie where the girl had seven
                                      Message 18 of 22 , May 4 5:32 PM
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        Theodor,
                                        Would you be so good as to explain some of these multiple personalities you
                                        appear to have. Is it anything like the movie where the girl had seven
                                        personalities fighting to get out? Have you ever sought treatment for you
                                        'condition'?
                                        Mike T


                                        >From: Theodor Grekenquist <grekenquist@...>
                                        >Reply-To: anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com
                                        >To: anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com
                                        >Subject: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: The man's deed
                                        >Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 20:27:18 +0200
                                        >
                                        >Hello Steve, you wrote:
                                        >
                                        > >I had a co-worker about a year ago who confided to me early on that
                                        > >he was both bipolar and suffered from attention deficit disorder. He
                                        > >also smoked and drank strong coffee, so he literally bounced off the
                                        > >walls. He was keenly intelligent with strong reverence for
                                        > >mathematics and science especially. He entrusted to me the fact
                                        > >that he needed a grounded experience of the material world as his
                                        > >sole reality. He never dreamed. When I attempted to introduce
                                        > >basic principles of spiritual science and its logical ground he
                                        > >would get visibly agitated, as if he was losing his bearings. I had
                                        > >to change the subject, and eventually gave up this idea, which made
                                        > >him comfortable again. It was just one of those things. He was
                                        > >completely convinced that there could be no underlying reality
                                        > >invisible to his senses and logic, and the very idea was very upsetting.
                                        >
                                        >No underlying reality, invisible or invisible, logical or illogical,
                                        >is upsetting to me in the slightest. If something is illogical and
                                        >invisible and inaudible and so on, it is also unthinkable to me and
                                        >therefore not real. I have never been spooked by anyone's non-entities.
                                        >
                                        >My multiple personalities are not related to fear, but they do result
                                        >in occasional temporary perplexity, bewilderment, until I find my
                                        >bearings again. They just happen.
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >Theodor Grekenquist
                                        >http://www.skeptic.com/
                                        >

                                        _________________________________________________________________
                                        realestate.com.au: the biggest address in property
                                        http://ninemsn.realestate.com.au
                                      • Judy Baumbauer
                                        Mike T schrieb: Theodor, Would you be so good as to explain some of these multiple personalities you appear to have. Is it anything
                                        Message 19 of 22 , May 5 7:32 AM
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          Mike T <leosun_75@...> schrieb:
                                          Theodor,
                                          Would you be so good as to explain some of these multiple personalities you
                                          appear to have. Is it anything like the movie where the girl had seven
                                          personalities fighting to get out?
                                           
                                          All About Eve, with Paul Newman's wife.
                                          Judy
                                           


                                          Telefonieren Sie ohne weitere Kosten mit Ihren Freunden von PC zu PC!
                                          Jetzt Yahoo! Messenger installieren!

                                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.